CCN more neutral? Well, I believe the operative word is "more." "More" than others but certainly NOT neutral. I find them extremely biased toward the pro-American, pro-Israel side. It takes intense concentration to stay neutral in any confrontation at all. The problem is "taking sides" is what leads to war, divorce, road rage, basically any argument of any kind between any two human beings. All confrontations between two or more human beings are the same. We have gang wars here in America. That is absolutely no different than America fighting with Iraq. They are ALL disagreements ending in fatalities. A friend of mine told me of a phrase. "Tribal mentality." It's my tribe over your tribe, regardless of the issue. No matter what side we take, IF we take a side, we are part of the problem. Peace resides halfway between one side and another. Whether it's America vs. Iraq, IRA vs. England, Apache vs. Cherokee, Sudanese vs. Chad, Talil vs. Sri Lankan, and the ever popular White vs. Black, Muslim vs. Christian vs. Jews in all sorts of angles, North vs. South, Spain vs. France, Romans vs. everyone around them, it's all the same. The details change but the concept is the same. The details don't matter, yet it's the details in which everyone gets bogged down. I was brought up Jewish, I lost relatives in WWII and in Israel, just to give context. So I "should" be on a certain side on certain issues. But instead, when I listen, I find CNN favoring American policy. When they interview Hezbollah and Lebanese representatives they keep asking the same questions about their opinions on the actions of Hezbollah. When these people make comments that many UN resolutions aren't being followed, some asking Israel to move out of areas and when these reps want to discuss what they believe is the underlying cause, CNN brushes right on by. When these Hezbollah and Lebanese reps ask the CNN interviewer, "Why do you think Hezbollah does this" the CNN interviewer brushes right on by. No one goes there. It is REALLY hard to stay neutral. I have found, all my life, that the only way to keep my head screwed on straight is to devote serious time to represent and debate the opposite side to myself, regardless of the subject. I try to talk myself into the side I "don't" naturally take. By the time I'm done, I'm neutral. I want to take a side and argue the details as much as the next person. It takes extreme effort not to do that. Peace is harder to maintain than war, but definitely worth it. If CNN were really neutral, why wouldn't they be covering Darfur more? The carnage there is far worse than anything happening in the Middle East. I watch CNN most of the time and it's hardly mentioned ever. As I am writing this, I hear the woman on CNN (Catherine Callaway) saying there's an upcoming story about how some Lebanese see the people shooting rockets at Israel as "heroes" and her tone is one of incredulousness, as if the concept is unbelievable. Why do we think that people who do not agree with us as crazy or fanatical or ridiculous? I don't agree with Hezbollah's tactics but I don't think that makes them crazy or terrorists. The only difference between a terrorist and a soldier is a uniform. Everything else is an excuse. Taking sides leads to war. Peace resides halfway between one side and the other. And it takes incredible mental effort to stay in the middle. As a Yankee it was hard to see the South's viewpoint and although I didn't agree with their decision to leave the Union, I understand why they wanted to. And the hardest one for me was the German WWII issue. Even though I disagree with what they did I understand how it can happen. It's hard to have compassion for our enemies but it's the only road to peace. There was a famous guy 2,000 years ago who did it and set the bar really high. Too high for most of us to reach. But always a target to shoot for. I'm trying to reach that bar, even though most times my emotions want to do otherwise. If we look around the world, we see how few of us rarely are able to hold onto peace. Usually, the only way is to feel peaceful from a distance. People who have no connections to an incident are able to say, "They should stop fighting" but rarely can give up their own fights. When I get reactions I don't like from people I have to force myself to focus on my own behavior and try to figure out what I am doing to bring on such a reaction, cause that makes me feel empowered. When I blame others, I leave myself victimized, powerless and with nothing left but to "strike" back. Multiply that by a few million people and you have war. War is just the argument between two people multiplied by more people, organized units with weapons and matching uniforms. I feel the news people are stimulating this conflict. I definitely hear CNN, FOX and others taking the Bush/Israel view and the Arabic news people taking the opposite view. Everyone is so obtuse. And the rest of the world is watching this and most people spending their time deciding which "side” they are going to take. Just stimulating more wars. NO news people are neutral. NONE are taking the side of peace. They ALL are reiterating the details of who did what to whom, stimulating the arguments. This is absolutely no different than two boys fighting in the schoolyard at recess and the teacher listening to the details of the two boys saying whose fault it is instead of saying that both boys are Don't you think Anderson Cooper, Soledad and all the rest know that the closer they are to the bombs, the more helmets they wear and sirens we hear in the background, the closer they get to a Pulitzer? And all at our expense. They are eating this action up. Darfur? No ratings, no Pulitzer opportunities, no high tech coverage, no symphonic background music available. So why bother? They really believe that what they do is so important. Yeah, to them. And the final word on CNN impartiality. How come we get a report person by person, to the exact count of every Israeli citizen that is hurt or killed yet all the numbers of citizens hurt in Lebanon is always an "unsubstantiated estimate" and if exact, explained as the "military" target they were standing near at the time. You call that neutral? I don't. Sorry for the length, but it's all backing up in my system.